Van's Air Force
Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.
Overhead Approach / Break
- Thread starter Webb
- Start date
what he said
...from faa.gov
http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim/Chap5/F0504027.gif
...from faa.gov
http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim/Chap5/F0504027.gif
Sam Buchanan
been here awhile
Bird's eye view of overhead break
Looks like Kahuna flew the overhead into AUW yesterday:
APRS track shows the upwind, break at mid-field, and circle to landing. The reason Mike's plane is depicted off the runway is because his last beacon was when he was taxiing to the terminal.
Looks like Kahuna flew the overhead into AUW yesterday:
APRS track shows the upwind, break at mid-field, and circle to landing. The reason Mike's plane is depicted off the runway is because his last beacon was when he was taxiing to the terminal.
the_other_dougreeves
Well Known Member
Saw some great examples of the overhead used at Nellis last week while working just north of Vegas. As others will tell you, part of the idea is to separate formation flights into a single file for the downwind, base and final. Airplanes peel off about every 5-6 sec in the 180 turn.
Saw (not in order) a pair of F-22s, 2 flights of F-15s (4x and 2x) and a pair of Thunderbirds all come in about the same time. Second F-15 flight followed the first and did the break so that all 6 fighters were spaced out more or less evenly on the downwind. Pretty sweet to see.
They seemed to do more of a hard 180, very short downwind leg and then a graceful 180 base leg straight to final.
TODR
Saw (not in order) a pair of F-22s, 2 flights of F-15s (4x and 2x) and a pair of Thunderbirds all come in about the same time. Second F-15 flight followed the first and did the break so that all 6 fighters were spaced out more or less evenly on the downwind. Pretty sweet to see.
They seemed to do more of a hard 180, very short downwind leg and then a graceful 180 base leg straight to final.
TODR
Looks like Kahuna flew the overhead into AUW yesterday:
APRS track shows the upwind, break at mid-field, and circle to landing. The reason Mike's plane is depicted off the runway is because his last beacon was when he was taxiing to the terminal.
I've seen him land and the beacon MAY just be accurate..
Happy Thanksgiving to Everyone...
Ah Ha
Got it!!!
Thanks. Truly a picture is worth a thousand words. Just thought it was a show pass before landing.
what he said
...from faa.gov
http://www.faa.gov/airports_airtraffic/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim/Chap5/F0504027.gif
Got it!!!
Thanks. Truly a picture is worth a thousand words. Just thought it was a show pass before landing.
gnuse
Well Known Member
Ya, think!!??
You might find some good info in this previous post.
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=34206&highlight=overhead+break
http://www.vansairforce.com/community/showthread.php?t=34206&highlight=overhead+break
That's an intense break! 2 g level turn to downwind works for me. I like to stay FAR compliant with this maneuver. More eyeballs watching.
Last edited:
Sorry, I should have said it was an F-16 break.
Ah! Now I understand more better.
Sam Buchanan
been here awhile
Kahuna
Moderatoring
OK You guys!
Yes the APRS is telling lies. IT missed the corner for the taxi way.
Ive been "spoken to" by the locals here about my overhead approach. "We dont do that stuff around here" they said.
Sometimes you just got to keep your mouth shut and keep doing what ya do.
Im generally too tired to educate folks anymore. Instead, I lead by example.
I can just hear em when I arrive. "Oh great, its that red RV again, hes back doing those wierd approaches again" I dont have the patience to tell em all the good reasons why we do it. All they wnna do is complain and critique.
Its cold up here. Had the ole girl at -14degF OAT the other day at 11.5 over NY state.. Ran strong, toes cold. Brrrr.
Happy Holidays.
Yes the APRS is telling lies. IT missed the corner for the taxi way.
Ive been "spoken to" by the locals here about my overhead approach. "We dont do that stuff around here" they said.
Sometimes you just got to keep your mouth shut and keep doing what ya do.
Im generally too tired to educate folks anymore. Instead, I lead by example.
I can just hear em when I arrive. "Oh great, its that red RV again, hes back doing those wierd approaches again" I dont have the patience to tell em all the good reasons why we do it. All they wnna do is complain and critique.
Its cold up here. Had the ole girl at -14degF OAT the other day at 11.5 over NY state.. Ran strong, toes cold. Brrrr.
Happy Holidays.
Its funny to me how some people who have limited experiences think those experiences are the only safe and legal way to do things. I hate to inform them that book called the FAR/AIM is a little thicker than their limited knowledge or that its gotten a little thicker since the last time they opened it. Some of them would be amazed whats really in there, if they would just open it.
Top_prop
Well Known Member
AKA "the break"
The image above was scanned from the T-34 Primary Flight Training Instruction...
We (the US Navy) don't do 'breaks' like the AIM depicts... part of the reason for doing a break is that if you loose your engine and stay clean you have a good chance of making it to the runway or an off duty runway... so we tend to break a bit further upwind in the T-34... what is depicted in the FAR AIM is more of what we'd call a short break... with an extended down wind... When I break abeam the down wind numbers the power goes to idle until I'm about to touch down... its more of a left hand corkscrew in that case... putting realestate on an extended down wind between you and the runway is a bad idea...
The image above was scanned from the T-34 Primary Flight Training Instruction...
We (the US Navy) don't do 'breaks' like the AIM depicts... part of the reason for doing a break is that if you loose your engine and stay clean you have a good chance of making it to the runway or an off duty runway... so we tend to break a bit further upwind in the T-34... what is depicted in the FAR AIM is more of what we'd call a short break... with an extended down wind... When I break abeam the down wind numbers the power goes to idle until I'm about to touch down... its more of a left hand corkscrew in that case... putting realestate on an extended down wind between you and the runway is a bad idea...
sprucemoose
Well Known Member
Oh, cut them some slack. They're obviously still sore about the Packers loss on Monday night. That kind of thing can put the whole state in a funk.
Cold? You ain't seen cold yet. Come back in two months, but put another heat muff in and block off your oil cooler first.
N395V
Well Known Member
I would hazard a guess that these are the same locals that...
Do not do position reports in the pattern
Shoot 10 mile finals from the direction they are returning home
Fly downwind several miles out from the runway
Never practice emergency landings
Only fly 10 hours a year
Land in peoples back yards when the engine quits cuz they can't make the runway from their B 52 pattern
Last weekend we had a formation of 6 (I think AT6s) fly in for fuel. Did a beautiful overhead break, real class act and professional.
Not one of the locals had the cajone's to say a word to them. But boy you can easily guess the topic of discussion after they departed.
As you said trying to educate them is an exercise in futility.
Top_prop
Well Known Member
At a local FBO without a tower, but with contract fuel and complementary chow, we find light civil, T-34's and T-6 Texan II's mixing together frequently. We've had a number of near mid airs between T-6's and T-34's... we T-34's have had a gentlemen's agreement... enter non towered fields with civil patterns using FAR/AIM civil box pattern procedures (typically 45 to down wind.. etc)...
The T-6's decided their wasn't anything saying they couldn't break... so they did the break... they also have a top speed around 300 KIAS... not giving much time to deconflict when they came screaming into the pattern when we were flying 100 KIAS in and flying the 'box'...
Anyways... my point is even with professional millitary pilots who are familiar with break procedures, using the same lingo (like saying "180 three down and locked", instead of calling a base to final turn like in the box) using the break at Non Towered fields can yield bad results... eventually the commander of the T-6's banned them executing the break at this particular airfield, though we nearly turnd many folks into smoking holes...
so respect the break when mixing with traffic... expecially unfamiliar traffic!
but don' be afraid of it! Its an effective way to enter and expidiously recover lots of traffic... if they are all doing the same thing the same way!
The T-6's decided their wasn't anything saying they couldn't break... so they did the break... they also have a top speed around 300 KIAS... not giving much time to deconflict when they came screaming into the pattern when we were flying 100 KIAS in and flying the 'box'...
Anyways... my point is even with professional millitary pilots who are familiar with break procedures, using the same lingo (like saying "180 three down and locked", instead of calling a base to final turn like in the box) using the break at Non Towered fields can yield bad results... eventually the commander of the T-6's banned them executing the break at this particular airfield, though we nearly turnd many folks into smoking holes...
so respect the break when mixing with traffic... expecially unfamiliar traffic!
but don' be afraid of it! Its an effective way to enter and expidiously recover lots of traffic... if they are all doing the same thing the same way!
L.Adamson
Well Known Member
But for the record, can I assume that if I'm not one of those 3,4,5 or more airplanes doing the overhead approach.......................that I must fly some 360's away from the airport (hoping my engines doesn't quit); until the overhead approach pilots are down?
Of course I know the reasons the overhead approach is used, and I'm not complaining. But on the otherhand, if an airport is busy; all pilots certainly won't be on the same page. My only real complaint is "helicopters"...
L.Adamson --- fly's tight arcing patterns, but won't feel bad about a 10 mile "straight in" in the middle of nowhere with no traffic...
edit: just read the reply before mine, while I was typing. I'd say it say's it best about "mixing". And I do live under an "untowered" pattern.
Last edited:
Ron Lee
Well Known Member
L. Adamson, my view of the overhead (which I do sometimes) is that at an untowered airport, traffic using a "normal" box pattern has priority. Multiple reasons but if there is a potential conflict, and I am leading the RV flight, I will abort the overhead and give way to the Cessna/Piper/Cub.
I now see Cozys and Cessnas (on one occasion) do overhead approaches.
I now see Cozys and Cessnas (on one occasion) do overhead approaches.
Don't get me wrong. I think that we should all play nice, like others have said if the pattern has traffic, and sometimes any traffic at all, I will not do an overhead. I am gonna give them the right of way, the last thing I am trying to do is get in first. My problem comes when people who don't know the rules think that they know the rules. There are several ways to skin a cat in business of aviation, just because somebody does something different then you doesn't necessarily make it less legal or safe.
as far as altitudes go, they are flown at traffic pattern altitude.
as far as altitudes go, they are flown at traffic pattern altitude.
tnelson
Well Known Member
Navy Overhead
At the boat the break is flown at 800' AGL. Downwind or established in the pattern at 600' AGL. The downside of the overhead in the civilian world is that the overhead/pattern altitudes for the break are not standardized. If they were, life would be great. We routinely bring 20+ jets aboard with no comm. just look outside and follow your interval.
At the boat the break is flown at 800' AGL. Downwind or established in the pattern at 600' AGL. The downside of the overhead in the civilian world is that the overhead/pattern altitudes for the break are not standardized. If they were, life would be great. We routinely bring 20+ jets aboard with no comm. just look outside and follow your interval.
L.Adamson
Well Known Member
But...................at our untowered airport (which I live next too), we have planes coming in from various directions, and the spacing/timing is far from being uniform.
In this situation, we'd all need "comms", even if it's a handheld (best tied to a headset)!
L.Adamson
Top_prop
Well Known Member
untowered airport... navy break... done every day
we do breaks at non towered airports every monday through friday at airfields all over the panhandle and lower alabama...
We (T-34's/T-6's) use 1100' agl as the initial alt, and 800' AGL for pattern alt.
To enter from all directions you fly to an 3 mile initial point (use the runway for a mile 'ruler') for the runway inuse and intercept at no great than a 45 deg angle measured from runway heading...
Only coms that we make are calling:
"(side number) 3 Mile initial rw XX"
'(side number) Break [while breaking with interval... interval is the traffic you are breaking behind atleast abeam your wing]"
'(side number) 180, three down"
works like a charm if everybody knows and follows the rules... that said we also post a "RDO" (runway duty officer) to make sure everybody is following the rules and their gear really is down and locked... ... he's not really a controller... just a safety observer.
Seems like most days when Junior is in the front flying we T-34's are about 1/2 piloted (ie a single pilot minus half a pilot due to the student in the front).
When light civil wants to land, the RDO sends all of us up to the "delta pattern" Its a 1400' MSL race track (about 1200' AGL). Once the light civil has departed the duty runway/air port we drop back down and keep on knocking out those Touch and Go's...
6+ aircraft in the pattern at a time is not uncommon... and most of them got there using the break... (we also enter the pattern opposite of the break with a simulated engine out spiral we call a PEL (precautionary emergency landing).... its fun being the RDO and making sure the break/pattern traffic and the PEL traffic follow the rules to mix opposite direction traffice without making smoking holes).
But we are a bunch of crazy orange and white .mil types...
we do breaks at non towered airports every monday through friday at airfields all over the panhandle and lower alabama...
We (T-34's/T-6's) use 1100' agl as the initial alt, and 800' AGL for pattern alt.
To enter from all directions you fly to an 3 mile initial point (use the runway for a mile 'ruler') for the runway inuse and intercept at no great than a 45 deg angle measured from runway heading...
Only coms that we make are calling:
"(side number) 3 Mile initial rw XX"
'(side number) Break [while breaking with interval... interval is the traffic you are breaking behind atleast abeam your wing]"
'(side number) 180, three down"
works like a charm if everybody knows and follows the rules... that said we also post a "RDO" (runway duty officer) to make sure everybody is following the rules and their gear really is down and locked... ... he's not really a controller... just a safety observer.
Seems like most days when Junior is in the front flying we T-34's are about 1/2 piloted (ie a single pilot minus half a pilot due to the student in the front).
When light civil wants to land, the RDO sends all of us up to the "delta pattern" Its a 1400' MSL race track (about 1200' AGL). Once the light civil has departed the duty runway/air port we drop back down and keep on knocking out those Touch and Go's...
6+ aircraft in the pattern at a time is not uncommon... and most of them got there using the break... (we also enter the pattern opposite of the break with a simulated engine out spiral we call a PEL (precautionary emergency landing).... its fun being the RDO and making sure the break/pattern traffic and the PEL traffic follow the rules to mix opposite direction traffice without making smoking holes).
But we are a bunch of crazy orange and white .mil types...
Last edited:
the_other_dougreeves
Well Known Member
Well said. If everyone knows and follows the same procedures, it works great - efficient, safe, simple. The problem is when different people are expecting the different things.
At a civilian non-towered field, I'm expecting people to make a 45-deg entry to a left downwind per the AIM unless right traffic or some other rules apply. I'm always looking (and listening) for people doing non-standard things. As with the 20 mile straight-in final, the overhead is non-standard. Although non-standard, the overhead is safe as long as it's not mixed with standard patterns.
One obvious exception applies: NORDO traffic can't hear you announce the overhead and may not be expecting you; likewise, you will not hear them and may not be expecting them.
TODR
ronschreck
Well Known Member
Many standards!
Doug,
To be fair, an overhead approach is a STANDARD approach and it is described in the AIM. I will admit that it is not the most COMMON VFR approach maneuver, but it is a very efficient way to get 4, 6, or 35 aircraft on the ground with minimal interference with other airport traffic. And, the overhead can blend in with the standard rectangular pattern traffic by delaying the break or flying straight through on initial and re-entering if necessary. Those of us who do elect to use the overhead pattern should be aware that many GA pilots have not made themselves knowledgeable of the overhead pattern and it would be helpful if the flight leader is overly descriptive of his intentions. As always, good visual lookout, clear communication and courtesy always make things go smoother.
Doug,
To be fair, an overhead approach is a STANDARD approach and it is described in the AIM. I will admit that it is not the most COMMON VFR approach maneuver, but it is a very efficient way to get 4, 6, or 35 aircraft on the ground with minimal interference with other airport traffic. And, the overhead can blend in with the standard rectangular pattern traffic by delaying the break or flying straight through on initial and re-entering if necessary. Those of us who do elect to use the overhead pattern should be aware that many GA pilots have not made themselves knowledgeable of the overhead pattern and it would be helpful if the flight leader is overly descriptive of his intentions. As always, good visual lookout, clear communication and courtesy always make things go smoother.
Many of you have recognized a major problem and I will use myself as an example. I had my first lesson in Dec. 1961 and have been flying off and on ever since. Commercial, multiengine, instrument with no military and not much interest in military type flying.
I never heard of an overhead break until I started following this forum. Only understood it after following this forum. Then realized I do variations all the time in my J3 Cub at grass strips.
Problem is, there are a lot of us out there: some with good knowledge and application of AIM Sec 3 Airport Operations, and some without. But most of us don't have the foggiest about some that you guys consider safe and appropriate. Therein lies the problem.
When doing the overhead break assume that only you and/or your group know what you are up to ( even the terminology is foreign and confusing to others) and proceed accordingly. Most of us just don't know.
Ken
I never heard of an overhead break until I started following this forum. Only understood it after following this forum. Then realized I do variations all the time in my J3 Cub at grass strips.
Problem is, there are a lot of us out there: some with good knowledge and application of AIM Sec 3 Airport Operations, and some without. But most of us don't have the foggiest about some that you guys consider safe and appropriate. Therein lies the problem.
When doing the overhead break assume that only you and/or your group know what you are up to ( even the terminology is foreign and confusing to others) and proceed accordingly. Most of us just don't know.
Ken
Top_prop
Well Known Member
Thanks. I too expect the same unless its a field I know we've posted an RDO and are using that field for Student Naval Aviator training... then I love comming in for the break. Oh and I'll request it at civil towered fields and shoot it if available... many towers have commented they wish they could recover all ther VFR traffic like that... quick and easy.
A good cautious pilot is always looking for the idiot who's trying to kill him. But, I don't think its not 'standard.' Perhaps it's fairer to say its not common enough to be considered standardized among non .mil experience pilots.
Nordo and the break do have somewhat common procedures... you rock your wings when going to break... if you see everyone in the patern, it really won't matter if they see you rocking your wings or not not because you get your interval on them and do your break turn in behind them onto the down wind, but if you shoot a break at towered field they'll see the wing rock and know you need aldis lamp signals from the 180 turn to final...
The break has been around a long time and is great. But it is really confusing for most GA types who have little to no exposure to it... so I use the 45 to down wind at non towered civil fields as well... not due to its questionable safety but due to the oher guy's unpredicability when exposed to it.
the_other_dougreeves
Well Known Member
At towered fields, recovering a flight using the break may be the way to do it. It's clear to the controller and everyone else exactly what is going on. I've flown out of towered fields where there are rarely more 2 aircraft inbound or outbound (GPM) and ones where it's not uncommon to be #5 for the runway (ADS). Using the break at ADS doesn't help that much because of the speed differentials that exist between a G5, King Air and 172 and the need to keep arrivals high until at midfield so that departures have a way to egress the Class D without getting into the Class B.
At non-towered airports, it's very clear that the preferred pattern entry is a 45 to midfield left downwind; see AC 90-66. Other patterns and pattern entries may be acceptable; the Feds do explicitly not say what is acceptable and what isn't, just what's preferred.
Short approaches aren't standard, but I like to use them when I can; it saves time and eliminates the possibility of Bad Things happening if the engine quits, i.e., you will make the field.
When flying, the one rule I always use is not to do anything I don't want to explain to the insurance company or FAA in some sort of official hearing.
TODR
At non-towered airports, it's very clear that the preferred pattern entry is a 45 to midfield left downwind; see AC 90-66. Other patterns and pattern entries may be acceptable; the Feds do explicitly not say what is acceptable and what isn't, just what's preferred.
Short approaches aren't standard, but I like to use them when I can; it saves time and eliminates the possibility of Bad Things happening if the engine quits, i.e., you will make the field.
When flying, the one rule I always use is not to do anything I don't want to explain to the insurance company or FAA in some sort of official hearing.
TODR
Last edited:
the_other_dougreeves
Well Known Member
This is a good rule when operating anything mechanical around other people you do not know and trust. It's particularly true when you are at a size or weight disadvantage, i.e., when I'm riding my bicycle on the street.
I don't want to be in the right but dead when the whole thing could have been avoided. My life is worth more than that to me.
TODR
Alan Carroll
Well Known Member
What is "standard"?
My former home airport is base to an F-16 squadron, and I loved to watch them return to the field via the overhead approach. The tower has a very effective way of preventing conflicts with other traffic - it simply keeps others away from the pattern while the fighters are arriving.
I've never flown an overhead break myself, and was only dimly aware it existed prior to reading this forum (yes its in the AIM, but with virtually no real explanation). The AIM diagram is also not especially clear about where the ?standard? break should be. Is it at the upwind or downwind end of the runway? Also, is there a ?standard? altitude?
Personally I have no problem with someone using this approach, so long as those using it give way to existing traffic in the pattern.
My former home airport is base to an F-16 squadron, and I loved to watch them return to the field via the overhead approach. The tower has a very effective way of preventing conflicts with other traffic - it simply keeps others away from the pattern while the fighters are arriving.
I've never flown an overhead break myself, and was only dimly aware it existed prior to reading this forum (yes its in the AIM, but with virtually no real explanation). The AIM diagram is also not especially clear about where the ?standard? break should be. Is it at the upwind or downwind end of the runway? Also, is there a ?standard? altitude?
Personally I have no problem with someone using this approach, so long as those using it give way to existing traffic in the pattern.
ronschreck
Well Known Member
I wish everyone sharred your opinion. Rest assured that I will give way to you and anyone else in the rectangular pattern. Timing the overhead break makes it easy to fit into the flow. I do, however object to bomber" patterns. (Student pilots excepted.) If you can't make the runway should your engine fail on base leg you are probably a bomber pilot.
I take exception!
Actually student pilots (and their instructors) should be the very ones talked to about "bomber" patterns. They are the ones learning BAD habits.
chrispratt
Well Known Member
I'm like Ken. I learned to fly in the early 70's (civilian only) and yet I had never heard of an overhead break until a couple of years ago when I did a few basic formation flights out of 52F.
To me, the issue is not the rightness or wrongness of using this approach. The military has proven it is safe and efficient. I think it's the practical side of the issue that matters -- self preservation.
I believe there are many pilots out there (possibly the majority of civilian flyers) who are not aware of what this term means when they hear it...especially if the first time they hear it is in the pattern. I doubt that many civilian flight instructors ever discuss, much less demonstrate, this approach -- I know mine never did. Just think what the world would be like if every student in a C-150 was doing an overhead break
So not to beat a dead horse, but I think it behooves us all, to err on the side of caution when using this approach at an uncontrolled airport. It will only take one accident to reflect poorly on us all. My 2 cents.
Chris
more to the story
Not to try and confuse the discussion more here, but there's a missing piece of the story that we haven't discussed.
True, the overhead (OH) is a great way to safely recover a lot of airplanes to a full stop in a short amount of time. Especially in controlled environments such as the middle of the ocean when landing on 'the boat', or at an airport with a control tower. However, the OH maneuver is just one piece of a more complex traffic pattern at some of our busier AF bases, such as those that conduct pilot training. Typically these patterns, although within a Class D, are somewhat uncontrolled just as most of our civilian fields. I'll try to explain a bit more.
At these busy bases, there are actually two patterns, inside and outside. The inside pattern is probably within 1/2 mile or so of the runway, the outside pattern more like 4 miles. The inside pattern is what we like to fly since we get more landings per time; the outside pattern is known as the 'penalty box' or has been said here, the 'bomber pattern'. The only way to the runway is from the inside pattern, or straight in from the outside pattern.
There are a plethora of different scenarios to talk through...let me highlight a couple. When flying up initial for the OH (since this topic is about the OH) you may not be allowed to 'break' and enter the inside pattern for landing. Instead, you may have to carry through initial and fly around the penalty box to try again. Here's why; if another airplane just completed a T&G and is entering the inside pattern before you are at a 3 mile initial, then you get to carry through initial and go around the penalty box since the two aircraft would have been a conflict on downwind. If an airplane called the straight in before you called 3 mile initial, then you get to carry through initial and go around the penalty box because the two aircraft would be a conflict on final. As a way to make the pattern more efficient, there is the possibility of 'breaking' at the departure end of the runway, which builds spacing and may avoid a conflict. It just depends.
So I'm sure this is clear as mud right now. My point is just that flying OH maneuver in a busy pattern requires rules (like calling your position at exact geographic locations) and understanding by all participants, and is why pilot training students actually tape the pattern (both inside and outside) to the floor and walk around making their radio calls as practice for the real thing.
So how does this relate to RV flying? Well, since we don't have the structure I tried to describe above, then if we want to do an OH (yes, I do them too) then we need to be prepared to carry though initial and either fly around the penalty box to try it again, or simply not execute the ?break? part of the OH maneuver and simply enter the civilian rectangular pattern from the upwind leg.
So, in my best Paul Harvey voice, ?now you know the rest [or at least some more] of the story? ...
Fly safe,
-Jim
Not to try and confuse the discussion more here, but there's a missing piece of the story that we haven't discussed.
True, the overhead (OH) is a great way to safely recover a lot of airplanes to a full stop in a short amount of time. Especially in controlled environments such as the middle of the ocean when landing on 'the boat', or at an airport with a control tower. However, the OH maneuver is just one piece of a more complex traffic pattern at some of our busier AF bases, such as those that conduct pilot training. Typically these patterns, although within a Class D, are somewhat uncontrolled just as most of our civilian fields. I'll try to explain a bit more.
At these busy bases, there are actually two patterns, inside and outside. The inside pattern is probably within 1/2 mile or so of the runway, the outside pattern more like 4 miles. The inside pattern is what we like to fly since we get more landings per time; the outside pattern is known as the 'penalty box' or has been said here, the 'bomber pattern'. The only way to the runway is from the inside pattern, or straight in from the outside pattern.
There are a plethora of different scenarios to talk through...let me highlight a couple. When flying up initial for the OH (since this topic is about the OH) you may not be allowed to 'break' and enter the inside pattern for landing. Instead, you may have to carry through initial and fly around the penalty box to try again. Here's why; if another airplane just completed a T&G and is entering the inside pattern before you are at a 3 mile initial, then you get to carry through initial and go around the penalty box since the two aircraft would have been a conflict on downwind. If an airplane called the straight in before you called 3 mile initial, then you get to carry through initial and go around the penalty box because the two aircraft would be a conflict on final. As a way to make the pattern more efficient, there is the possibility of 'breaking' at the departure end of the runway, which builds spacing and may avoid a conflict. It just depends.
So I'm sure this is clear as mud right now. My point is just that flying OH maneuver in a busy pattern requires rules (like calling your position at exact geographic locations) and understanding by all participants, and is why pilot training students actually tape the pattern (both inside and outside) to the floor and walk around making their radio calls as practice for the real thing.
So how does this relate to RV flying? Well, since we don't have the structure I tried to describe above, then if we want to do an OH (yes, I do them too) then we need to be prepared to carry though initial and either fly around the penalty box to try it again, or simply not execute the ?break? part of the OH maneuver and simply enter the civilian rectangular pattern from the upwind leg.
So, in my best Paul Harvey voice, ?now you know the rest [or at least some more] of the story? ...
Fly safe,
-Jim
Top_prop
Well Known Member
Penalty Pattern? %<
No offense, but in over 3000 hrs flying for the navy I've never seen a penalty pattern used in conjunction with the military oval pattern... might be some AF specific thing at a specific base.
If some sneeks in for a straight in you wave off at your 180 and let him be number one (in the military oval pattern you never extend your down wind unless directed by tower... it screws up the interval and turn to final for all others following you). When at the crosswind in the pattern and someone wants to break the first one to call their turn gets to go number one... or you turn as tower directs... it really is simple and efficient --- if everyone knows and follows the same rules.
I promise you we have Student Naval aviators with less than 30Hrs in the T-34 soloing at multiple fields using non towered break procedures every monday through friday... its not magic nor complicated.
No offense, but in over 3000 hrs flying for the navy I've never seen a penalty pattern used in conjunction with the military oval pattern... might be some AF specific thing at a specific base.
If some sneeks in for a straight in you wave off at your 180 and let him be number one (in the military oval pattern you never extend your down wind unless directed by tower... it screws up the interval and turn to final for all others following you). When at the crosswind in the pattern and someone wants to break the first one to call their turn gets to go number one... or you turn as tower directs... it really is simple and efficient --- if everyone knows and follows the same rules.
I promise you we have Student Naval aviators with less than 30Hrs in the T-34 soloing at multiple fields using non towered break procedures every monday through friday... its not magic nor complicated.
Last edited:
terrykohler
Well Known Member
Just to add some fuel to the fire, I'd like to propose a survey with the following questions:
1. As a flight instructor, have you taught the overhead to
a. Primary Students
b. Commercial Students
c. Flight Instructor or ATP candidates
2. As a Student at any level, has an instructor included the Overhead Approach as part of your training (without your prompting him/her to do so)?
3. If you are ever to be named as a contributing or proximate cause of an aircraft accident as a result of using an overhead approach in an uncontrolled environment, would you be willing to share this survey information with
a. Your insurance carrier
b. An accident or FAA investigator
c. An attorney
Finally,
4. If you are part of a formation flight entering a non-tower enviroment for an overhead approach, how much of your attention was devoted to observing other traffic in and out of the pattern, and how much was devoted to holding close flight position?
This survey will self destruct in 30 seconds.
Terry
1. As a flight instructor, have you taught the overhead to
a. Primary Students
b. Commercial Students
c. Flight Instructor or ATP candidates
2. As a Student at any level, has an instructor included the Overhead Approach as part of your training (without your prompting him/her to do so)?
3. If you are ever to be named as a contributing or proximate cause of an aircraft accident as a result of using an overhead approach in an uncontrolled environment, would you be willing to share this survey information with
a. Your insurance carrier
b. An accident or FAA investigator
c. An attorney
Finally,
4. If you are part of a formation flight entering a non-tower enviroment for an overhead approach, how much of your attention was devoted to observing other traffic in and out of the pattern, and how much was devoted to holding close flight position?
This survey will self destruct in 30 seconds.
Terry
L.Adamson
Well Known Member
N395V
Well Known Member
In 30 years I have never been interupted in a pattern by someone doing and overhead. I have never seen an overhead disrupt traffic in a pattern.
I am not aware of any accidents, incidents, or fatalities caused by an overhead. By and large those that do them are cautious and courteous and yeild to conflicting traffic .
On the other hand I frequently suffer from and observe aircraft entering straight in, from the right from the left from just about anywhere except where you would expect them. Usually when I read about a midair in proximity of an airport no mention is made of the patterns being flown. This group by and large is not courteous, not cautious, do not yeild to those with the right of way and indeed are oblivious to other traffic.
As a student pilot (at a Marine Corps Air Station) I was taught the overhead. As a CFI I taught it to all of my students primary and advanced. I also taught them to fly standard patterns and to be cautious when entering any pattern for any type of approach. I seldom do an overhead because there are usually other aircraft in the pattern at most places I fly into. But when I do one I spend a good deal of my time looking for other aircraft both in the positions they should be in as well as trying to spot those that are where they shouldn't be.
I would not hesitate to talk to my insurance company or the FAA about it. It is in th AIM, it is not illegal. If you are cautious, vigilent, courteous it is not dangerous to you or others. If it is inherently dangerous it should be removeed from the AIM and the FAA should prohibit it.
You are more likely to get involved in a midair with someone doing a nostandard (convenience) approach than you are with someone doing an overhead.
I am not aware of any accidents, incidents, or fatalities caused by an overhead. By and large those that do them are cautious and courteous and yeild to conflicting traffic .
On the other hand I frequently suffer from and observe aircraft entering straight in, from the right from the left from just about anywhere except where you would expect them. Usually when I read about a midair in proximity of an airport no mention is made of the patterns being flown. This group by and large is not courteous, not cautious, do not yeild to those with the right of way and indeed are oblivious to other traffic.
As a student pilot (at a Marine Corps Air Station) I was taught the overhead. As a CFI I taught it to all of my students primary and advanced. I also taught them to fly standard patterns and to be cautious when entering any pattern for any type of approach. I seldom do an overhead because there are usually other aircraft in the pattern at most places I fly into. But when I do one I spend a good deal of my time looking for other aircraft both in the positions they should be in as well as trying to spot those that are where they shouldn't be.
I would not hesitate to talk to my insurance company or the FAA about it. It is in th AIM, it is not illegal. If you are cautious, vigilent, courteous it is not dangerous to you or others. If it is inherently dangerous it should be removeed from the AIM and the FAA should prohibit it.
You are more likely to get involved in a midair with someone doing a nostandard (convenience) approach than you are with someone doing an overhead.
How much attention is devoted to looking for traffic in the pattern?
Lead: essentially all
Wingmen: essentially none (until the break, then same as lead)
rv9aviator
Well Known Member
After reading all the posts here is my observation. I have been flying for almost 20 years and had never heard of the Overhead before this forum. I have no military experience and learned to fly in a rural area with very few towered airports and very little military traffic. I do fly into a National Guard based airport frequently which has a lot of jet traffic. The only thing I noticed is the jets disappear when I get anywhere near Fort Smith. My instructor never mentioned this type of pattern and I would have no idea what the other pilot was talking about when he announced an OH. I am thankful for learning about this even at this late date as it might save some confusion later on. I have no issue at all with this procedure but our instructors need to educate us on this.
Could'nt help but chime in here to emphasize a couple of "pro break" points -
1) The break (or overhead) is not intended to cut into a pattern without regard to those aircraft already in the pattern. The up-wind entry is extended as required to establish an interval on the last aircraft already in the pattern so as not to cut out anyone already there.
2) The downwind or final is not extended to create interval. If the entry was done correctly, it should not be necessary, or desired as noted by Top Prop. At the 180 (position abeam the landing area) you are now #1 for landing.
3) It is most certainly the primary duty of the lead to set interval for the flight (as JIm said). That's why he is the "lead"!!
4) It is certainly a way to get a smooth transistion from high speed to landing expeditiously. Rolling into a 45 or so bank level turn at 180 knots, power slowly back to idle puts me at 80 knots ready for flaps on downwind in my -6 pretty much every time.
5) It keeps the pattern neat, consistent, CLOSE, and orderly as opposed to various entries at various altitudes.
It's not perfect, it's not for everyone, but it is nothing to be scared of or shunned.
Thanks - out.
1) The break (or overhead) is not intended to cut into a pattern without regard to those aircraft already in the pattern. The up-wind entry is extended as required to establish an interval on the last aircraft already in the pattern so as not to cut out anyone already there.
2) The downwind or final is not extended to create interval. If the entry was done correctly, it should not be necessary, or desired as noted by Top Prop. At the 180 (position abeam the landing area) you are now #1 for landing.
3) It is most certainly the primary duty of the lead to set interval for the flight (as JIm said). That's why he is the "lead"!!
4) It is certainly a way to get a smooth transistion from high speed to landing expeditiously. Rolling into a 45 or so bank level turn at 180 knots, power slowly back to idle puts me at 80 knots ready for flaps on downwind in my -6 pretty much every time.
5) It keeps the pattern neat, consistent, CLOSE, and orderly as opposed to various entries at various altitudes.
It's not perfect, it's not for everyone, but it is nothing to be scared of or shunned.
Thanks - out.
L.Adamson
Well Known Member
So basically..........
It's the "lead" waiting for any traffic already in the pattern. The lead makes a landing, and all wingmen follow suit. In the meantime, it's best for any other traffic, to orbit somewhere else, for a bit... Correct?
I have nothing against the overhead approach. It doesn't look scary. It's more efficent for getting a lot of aircraft down; and it looks "cool".
But it just doesn't mix at a busy non-towered airport.........right?
L.Adamson
zspivey
Well Known Member
Interest in overhead approach
This topic certainly has generated a lot of comments.
I was exposed to the overhead approach during my Air Force years. While in crew training for the C-130 at Little Rock, we frequently would end a tactical mission with an overhead approach. Can you imagine a 4 ship flight of Herky's coming in and doing a break? We did it although we did not fly formation in finger tip, it was always in trail.
When I started my RV8, I knew I would want to fly the overhead every chance I got. I do. If there is other traffic in the pattern, I ask myself, "Will this guy know what I am doing?" If the answer is yes, I fly an overhead. If the answer is no as is usually the case when student pilots are around, I use the normal 45 to downwind.
My feeling is the RV needs to be flown in the overhead. It is much more fun.
This topic certainly has generated a lot of comments.
I was exposed to the overhead approach during my Air Force years. While in crew training for the C-130 at Little Rock, we frequently would end a tactical mission with an overhead approach. Can you imagine a 4 ship flight of Herky's coming in and doing a break? We did it although we did not fly formation in finger tip, it was always in trail.
When I started my RV8, I knew I would want to fly the overhead every chance I got. I do. If there is other traffic in the pattern, I ask myself, "Will this guy know what I am doing?" If the answer is yes, I fly an overhead. If the answer is no as is usually the case when student pilots are around, I use the normal 45 to downwind.
My feeling is the RV needs to be flown in the overhead. It is much more fun.
